Pro-Russian activists occupy state buildings in three east Ukraine cities

Pro-Russian activists launched violent takeovers of government buildings on April 6 in the eastern Ukrainian cities of Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv. Many of them were Russian saboteurs, reported local journalists. In Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, about 500 pro-Russian forces took control of the Oblast State Administration building, reported the Ukrayinska Pravda news site, which is the local representative organ of the Presidential Administration. Its leader informed the activists that they need to hold on for a night, “Then help will arrive,” a direct reference to Russian soldiers. Even fewer demonstrators attended a protest that day. The building was freed by morning, reported Internal Affairs Minister Arsen Avakov.

 

In Donetsk, Ukraine’s fifth-largest city and the center of the most industrialized region, about 900 pro-Russian activists took control of the state oblast administration building, which is also the location of the oblast council. They set a midnight ultimatum, calling for the oblast council to hold a referendum today on joining the Russian Federation or face dismissal and be replaced by a coordinating council, reported the Ukrayinska Pravda news site. Eyewitnesses reported the activists are not local residents and are hostile even to local journalists. To enter the building, they brawled with police and threw grenades and simple explosives. About 2,000 protesters attended a demonstration that day.

 

Oligarch Serhiy Taruta, the head of the Donetsk Oblast State Administration, called for an emergency meeting of the National Security and Defense Council in Donetsk. “A scenario is being fulfilled today in the Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv oblasts aimed at the disruption of peace and social and economic instability,” Taruta said in a April 6 tweet. The same day, acting President Oleksandr Turchynov canceled a visit to Lithuania for a meeting of speakers of EU parliaments in order to hold an urgent meeting of heads of law enforcement organs.

 

In Luhansk, the center of the easternmost region of Ukraine, pro-Russian activists stormed the SBU offices, injuring 10, reported Ukrayinska Pravda. They used bricks, smoke bombs and simple explosives and took control of the weapons inside. About 2,000 demonstrators attended a pro-federalism protest that day. As in Donetsk, they called for electing a coordination council to replace the oblast council.

 

Donetsk oligarch Rinat Akhmetov and Luhansk businessman Oleksandr Yefremov are responsible for the separatist demonstrations in their respective oblasts, reported several prominent journalists. Akhmetov traveled to Moscow in March and April to visit Putin and reached an arrangement, reported Serhiy Leshchenko, a Ukrainian journalist, citing his well-placed sources.

 

Internal Affairs Minister Arsen Avakov blamed the violence on Russian President Vladimir Putin and former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who” arranged and paid for” the latest separatist wave, he said. “Few people gathered, but their aggressiveness sweeps off the scale,” Avakov wrote on April 6 on his Facebook page. “In Donetsk, among the storming crowds were many women and children. They are provoking a conflict with blood and victims.” In response to those demanding that he act, Avakov wrote that the situation will come under control without the police shooting at paid provocateurs.

 

Zenon Zawada: The risk of a Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine is as high as ever. Certain Ukrainian politicians are calling for police forces to respond and arrest the activists, but that would merely be playing into the hands of Putin, whose government is looking for even the slightest pretext to send its soldiers.

 

Indeed the Russian government is getting desperate after seeing the extremely low turnout for demonstrations in the last several weeks. As a result, pro-Russian activists have resorted to more extreme measures, calling for joining Russia (a clearer goal) instead of the calls for “federalism” in the previous weeks. This puts the Ukrainian government in a very difficult position: on the one hand, using force against the takeovers will give the Russian government the pretext to dispatch its soldiers. On the other hand, allowing activists to storm buildings discredits the central Kyiv government and its attempt to hold elections on May 25.

 

Unlike the Euro-Maidan protest movement in Kyiv, which involved hundreds of thousands of people from diverse economic classes arriving from all of Ukraine’s regions, the takeovers in eastern Ukraine involve mostly local extremists working in close contact with Russian agents. They are hostile to the press, whereas the Euro-Maidan welcomed any press attention it could get, and they are hostile to Ukrainian speakers and foreigners, whereas the Euro-Maidan involved many Russian-speakers and welcomed foreigners. In short, these protests don’t represent the mainstream middle and working classes of their respective cities. Unfortunately, the residents of these regions are passive and rather indifferent to whoever ends up taking charge.

 

Avakov has the right idea. The Ukrainian government needs to decide on how to use force in such a way (if at all) that doesn’t give the Russians the pretext to invade and doesn’t disrupt the May 25 vote. That would require some creativity on Avakov’s part. Yet it’s become apparent that the Russian government will keep fanning the flames of unrest until it gets the violent confrontation that it’s seeking.